EDITORIAL

Much ado about hairdos and freedom of choice

The Nation

What is the point of allowing schoolchildren to wear their hair as they choose if the system itself still doesn't provide a decent education?

BANGKOK: -- Are we giving hair more credit than it deserves? One school of thought defends the education minister's intention to "liberate" students by scrapping a rule on crewcuts for boys, whereas the other camp insists that students have been made to live within some kind of "box" for good reason. Both sides have produced sound arguments, but the bottom line is this: does hair really matter that much?

The Education Ministry may have come up with a good concept about self-expression, but it should begin with the much more important factor - the curriculum. It doesn't matter if students are allowed to sport seven-inch punk spikes or made to shave their heads every week as long as the approach of educators doesn't change. As far as children and education are concerned, "liberation" should begin with "how" they learn, not the way they dress for school.

A hairdo reflects self-expression, yes, but then again, it is also about youngsters' rebellious nature. Order them to wear their hair long and some will certainly go for a crewcut. Kids mock or evade rules not because the rules are bad, but simply because they are there. To the anti-rules camp, be careful what you stand for. The liberty to do anything with one's hair is the same as the liberty to wear a skirt so short that it ends nearly where it starts. If you support long hair, make sure you are prepared to support something more outrageous, like sex in school restrooms, or smoking, or liquor at parties for 13-year-olds.

Students will keep pushing the limits whatever the rules. We have seen it all - tight outfits, loose outfits, low waists, high waists. School rules are there to be violated by "independent" minds. And even the most independent of minds will find it difficult to live without rules. A debate in America involves a boy with spiked hair that his school deemed too extreme. His friends signed a petition to support him, but he was barred from class. Even in a "free" country, freedom has its boundaries.

To be sure, Thailand's school rules - such as crewcuts for boys - might need a rethink. But the rethink must come from a sincere attitude toward change in the adults who are responsible for education. It must come from a heartfelt admission that the "box" in which kids have had to stay has to be dismantled, and that hair should probably be the least of the ministry's concerns.

We have seen little indication from our politicians that they are ready to revolutionise the education system. The hair issue is symbolic at best and irrelevant at worst. It will be worth nothing if the ministry frees up the dress code while keeping children's minds locked because of a poor curriculum. And it's laughable if a minister who wants to be a champion of student freedom is removed in the next Cabinet reshuffle, as is routine the Education Ministry.

To some, a hairstyle reflects who you are. To others it's just a showcase. Some see the crewcut as a symbol of a draconian society, while others see it as a reminder to youngsters that there are times when they have to live within rules. To some, any kind of "uniform" is bad, because it takes away a degree of liberty. To others, shouldn't soldiers wear uniforms?

Shouldn't protesters be allowed to wear any colour they want? If you are pro-choice, you must be ready to go all the way. Being "liberal" is easier said than done, and one is more likely to end up being dubbed a hypocrite. Being "selectively liberal" won't do anybody any good. The education minister has won some fans thanks to his "brave" hair policy, but if he stops at hairstyle and does nothing to liberate students' brains, what is his point really? In other words, does his hair policy reflect who he is, or is it just a showcase for publicity?

-- The Nation 2013-01-22

To the anti-rules camp, be careful what you stand for. The liberty to do anything with one's hair is the same as the liberty to wear a skirt so short that it ends nearly where it starts. If you support long hair, make sure you are prepared to support something more outrageous, like sex in school restrooms, or smoking, or liquor at parties for 13-year-olds.

The Nation has gone crazy. A statement like this over a haircut?

Having been brought up to rule and regulation, it did not harm. And in fact gave adults a modicum of control they cannot get in the extreme cases like the US education system in what not to do. At least conformity is nothing too harsh, but having baggy pants and your ass crack visible, caps turned sideway cos it's 'cool' and wearing more bling than a Yowarat gold shop, is a way to lead Thai kids to rebel. That starts with long hair. Then the substances... The liberals only need to look at places like the US to see where that will lead. I for one advocate, keep the rules and concentrate on the standard of education. That is a priority, not fashion.

The student's head is like a computer. It doesn't matter what the computer looks like...If garbage goes into the computer, garbage comes out. Until the education ministry decides to overhaul its system, they are going to get the same results as before. Only the length of hair of the inadequately educated student will have changed.

To the anti-rules camp, be careful what you stand for. The liberty to do anything with one's hair is the same as the liberty to wear a skirt so short that it ends nearly where it starts. If you support long hair, make sure you are prepared to support something more outrageous, like sex in school restrooms, or smoking, or liquor at parties for 13-year-olds.

The Nation has gone crazy. A statement like this over a haircut?

What a stupid comment. How did you get from someone having a different hairstyle to having sex in restrooms? You have a very warped imagination. I suggest you get some help.

To the anti-rules camp, be careful what you stand for. The liberty to do anything with one's hair is the same as the liberty to wear a skirt so short that it ends nearly where it starts. If you support long hair, make sure you are prepared to support something more outrageous, like sex in school restrooms, or smoking, or liquor at parties for 13-year-olds.

The Nation has gone crazy. A statement like this over a haircut?

What a stupid comment. How did you get from someone having a different hairstyle to having sex in restrooms? You have a very warped imagination. I suggest you get some help.

It's a quote from the article. Don't ask me, ask the.Nation

Students will keep pushing the limits whatever the rules.

In really good schools there are rules, which students follow and enforce themselves. This includes standards of behavior, standards of dress. This frees up students from worrying about looking cool and concentrate on learning and being different, which is the reason they are there.

Parents pay huge sums of money to send children to such schools for a reason!

Usually complaints about dress code and behavior come from parents whose children go to free or state funded schools. School uniforms being the most common complaint. This usually revolves around cost. But it is cheaper to have a uniform than it is to pay for the latest fashion trends and all schools which mandate uniforms have a cheaper uniform or a more expensive longer lasting type.

As for crew cuts for boys. Head lice commonly break out in schools in all countries, if crew cuts reduce of limit this then maybe it make sense especially in a tropical climate.

This subject is world-wide and not limited to Thailand.

Edited January 22, 201313 yr by VocalNeal

To the anti-rules camp, be careful what you stand for. The liberty to do anything with one's hair is the same as the liberty to wear a skirt so short that it ends nearly where it starts. If you support long hair, make sure you are prepared to support something more outrageous, like sex in school restrooms, or smoking, or liquor at parties for 13-year-olds.

The Nation has gone crazy. A statement like this over a haircut?

I think you are going a bit far here with sex in restrooms etc, the fact is, public schools in Thailand are just a bit too militaristic, haircuts, uniforms on Kindergarten kids. If they would pay more attention to education instead of shaving heads and 17 year old boys wearing shorts, then maybe Thailand would be better than just a third world country.

To the anti-rules camp, be careful what you stand for. The liberty to do anything with one's hair is the same as the liberty to wear a skirt so short that it ends nearly where it starts. If you support long hair, make sure you are prepared to support something more outrageous, like sex in school restrooms, or smoking, or liquor at parties for 13-year-olds.

The Nation has gone crazy. A statement like this over a haircut?

What a stupid comment. How did you get from someone having a different hairstyle to having sex in restrooms? You have a very warped imagination. I suggest you get some help.

It's a quote from the article. Don't ask me, ask the.Nation

It might have been better if you'd quote marked the statement ... it might not have been read as yours then.

I see the recent change in haircut regulation not only as a Freedom Of Choice issue but a Removal Of Discrimination issue. Boys, Girls, State or Private school. All the same now just as it should be.

Would this same human rights, nutty logic apply to the armed forces?

Also, I am expected to look good for my job; shirt, tie, pressed trousers, shiny shoes, etc.. Could I turn up looking like a refugee from Ko Sarn Road and, when told to change or get out, quote my human right to look a mess?

Finally, this also means that no place can enforce a dress code. Tell that to The Oriental and the like.

Barmy.

"To the anti-rules camp, be careful what you stand for. The liberty to do anything with one's hair is the same as the liberty to wear a skirt so short that it ends nearly where it starts. If you support long hair, make sure you are prepared to support something more outrageous, like sex in school restrooms, or smoking, or liquor at parties for 13-year-olds." -The Nation

First of all, these things happened even when the haircut rules were in place. Secondly, this statement makes no sense at all. How does supporting change for haircut rules condone fornication in school, or underage smoking and alcohol consumption? This outrageous hyperbole really ought to be justified, if that's even possible.

Let me try and formulate some like the author does: "If you support long hair, then you support the option to pay your way out of murder" (That one already exists here already, actually). "If you like freedom of choice, then you condone killing kittens"

"Some see the crewcut as a symbol of a draconian society, while others see it as a reminder to youngsters that there are times when they have to live within rules" -The Nation

So then, when you grow up and grow your hair long, then you can stop obeying the rules right? Don't get me wrong, if this is an observation, it is 100% correct, most people don't live within the rules after they get out of school in Thailand. I am not sure this can read any other way as it is piss poor writing.

"Being "liberal" is easier said than done, and one is more likely to end up being dubbed a hypocrite. Being "selectively liberal" won't do anybody any good" - The Nation

Being selectively liberal, i.e. liberal on some issues and conservative on others, is what is colloquially known as "thinking for yourself" or "forming an opinion based on your experiences". In contrast, being totally devoted to one extreme or the other, like liberalism or conservatism, is known as "being a mindless drone" or "being ignorant and stupid".

I agree that the school standards/curriculum ought to be changed, but do try and write something that makes sense. This is among the most a$$ backwards opinion articles I think I have ever seen, and really doesn't even shed light on anything except that the author is dumber than $hit.

Even in a "free" country, freedom has its boundaries.

Surely, it should be better in a "fee" country like Thailand.

"To the anti-rules camp, be careful what you stand for. The liberty to do anything with one's hair is the same as the liberty to wear a skirt so short that it ends nearly where it starts. If you support long hair, make sure you are prepared to support something more outrageous, like sex in school restrooms, or smoking, or liquor at parties for 13-year-olds."

The Nation has gone crazy. A statement like this over a haircut?

What a stupid comment. How did you get from someone having a different hairstyle to having sex in restrooms? You have a very warped imagination. I suggest you get some help.

He wasn't saying it The Nation was, he should have added quotes, but it's in the OP.

That was his point.

The Thai school system is based on creating order in the citizenry from their earliest schooling.

Uniformes army style haircuts, and physical punishment to keep order,

and not accidentally prepare students to be good little soldiers and obedient citizens.

Which of course makes them compliant for the despot of any particular decade to use as he sees fit.

Edited January 22, 201313 yr by animatic